House Rejects Sex-Selection Abortion Ban

[Purveyor]

Source: Associated Press

(05-31) 11:33 PDT WASHINGTON, (AP) --

House Republicans lost an attempt to pass legislation making it a federal crime to carry out gender-based abortions.

In a campaign year when Democrats are accusing Republicans of waging a war against women, Republicans sought to portray the Prenatal Nondiscrimination Act as a women's rights issue.

But the legislation required a two-thirds majority for passage, because of procedural rules, and had no future in the Democratic Senate.

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2012/05/30/national/w223051D82.DTL

[PeaceNikki]

1. Good. Stupid anti-choice, women-hating, bullshit.

[onehandle]

2. Jobs, Jobs, Jobs! nt

[Enrique]

3. part of the "Luntz package"

http://go.bloomberg.com/political-economy/2012-05-30/hoyer-abortion-bill-a-luntz-package-without-substance/

Tomorrow’s planned House vote on legislation that would impose penalties for performing abortions for the purpose of gender selection is part of a “totally political” Republican agenda planned for the coming weeks, House Democratic Whip Steny Hoyer of Maryland told reporters.

The Maryland Democrat called the list of planned votes released by Majority Leader Eric Cantor “a Frank Luntz package of rhetoric without substance” — referring to the Republican consultant known for using focus groups to determine political language used in campaigns.

[sinkingfeeling]

6. Love Rep. Hoyer's definition of the agenda!

[MicaelS]

4. If Republicans could PROVE Homosexuality had a specfic genetic marker

And there was an amniocentesis based test for said marker, they would be ENCOURAGING women to have the test and abort each and every homosexual fetus.

I know this for a fact, because I have talked to several Republicans that have said exactly this.

[Myrina]

7. ... or better yet ...

... since in I'm sure more than a few cases, it's the sperm that passes on/activates genetic makeup (especially gender) in a fetus, let's just sterilize all men and be done with the need for abortions entirely.

Works for me.

[freshwest]

8. Okay, you naughty thing! I've argued this to stop abortions and gotten...

and cursed for it online.

'Works for me.'

[razorman]

11. It might happen some day. Science continually advances. If a genetic connection

to homosexuality is ever proved, it will dramatically change the political landscape of the issue. Who knows?

[Iliyah]

5. Where are the effing jobs

huh - GOPPERS????

We are not paying you to do stupid shit.

And if there is a specific gene, wouldn't just blow their argument away because they have always said its a choice or environmental.

Goppers are jerks!

[malthaussen]

9. But if the bill didn't pass

Does that not mean some Republicans jumped ship? That might actually be important -- they so often are in lockstep with the Program.

-- Mal

[Thor_MN]

15. the legislation required a two-thirds majority for passage, because of procedural rules

[gratuitous]

16. For some reason . . .

The Republicans fast-tracked the bill, using a suspension of rules procedure that required a two-thirds supermajority to pass PRENDA (or, if you're a cynical person, PRETENDA). So, even though the vote was 248-165 in favor, it was way short of the votes needed for passage on to the Senate, where it would have died anyway.

So, why did the Republicans do it? Well, it beats working for one. It gives every Republican Representative a chance to go back home and whine to their constituents about how much they loooooove little pre-born babies, but the eeeeeevil Democrats just hate, Hate, HATE them. Knowing their supporters, these assholes know their know-nothing voters will lap it up.

Just nobody mention all those jobs Boehner was harping about back in 2010, okay?

[rocktivity]

10. Whew. That means that Planned Parenthood sting didn't work

(link). Cue the Vonage theme!


rocktivity

[rebecca_herman]

12. And did this proposed bill mention how it would be enforced?

There is no practical way to enforce it. A ban on disclosing gender would never pass at this point, it would be too unpopular since almost all pregnant women really want to know the gender. You could ask every woman why she is having the abortion, but she could just as easily say that she can't afford it, doesn't want kids yet or at all, has too many kids already, etc.

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

13. Truth serum, waterboarding ...

we have ways ...

[cstanleytech]

14. “Ve haf vays of making you talk!" nt